> OOps, I may have looked at the wrong bart. I think he meant this BART: http://blogs.sun.com/gbrunett/entry/automating_solaris_10_file_integrity
I'm going to make one quick comment about this, despite better judgment to probably keep quiet. I don't think anyone should use ZFS as a VCS like Subversion ... that's nuts! How many developers on your project? How many sub projects, how many commits a day? I just started a new repo and I'm up in the hundreds in a few weeks. Do you want to keep that many snapshots around? Someone is going to get the idea to use ZFS like this, and 8 months from now, get bitter and heart-broken and dump on ZFS for not behaving like a VCS, which it is not. VCS has logs, easy diffs, easy rollback, merge, branch, feeds into build automation software, allows IDEs to be fed into it, integrates with tracking tools ... none of which ZFS does (and I'm not saying this like it's a bad thing.) If you want to do a code release, say, 1.0, put that on a ZFS filesystem, snapshot it, keep developing until you get to somewhere you want to call a 1.1, snapshot that ... that is a wonderful thing to do. You can clone and make active an entire bundle of stuff. But please, use versioning software (good ones are free, even) for versioning and don't shoehorn ZFS. CT _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
